The Washington Times
  • Subscribe
  • Times News Services
  • RSS
  • Mobile Headlines
  • e-edition
  • E-MAIL ALERTS
  • REGISTER
  • LOG IN
  • E-MAIL ALERTS
  • WELCOME
  • Your Profile
  • Log Out
  • Front Page Image
  • Classifieds
  • Autos
  • Real Estate
  • Jobs
  • Special Sections
  • Customer Service
  • Home
  • News
    • World
    • National
    • Politics
    • National Security
    • DC Area
    • Business
    • Entertainment
    • Technology
    • Investigations
    • Faith
    • Energy
    • Environment
    • Headlines
    • Citizen Journalism
  • Opinion
  • Sports
    • NFL
    • NBA/WNBA
    • MLB
    • NHL
    • Tennis
    • Golf
    • Motorsports
    • Soccer
    • NCAA
    • Olympics
    • Outdoors
    • Other
  • Culture
    • Home & Living
    • Family & Kids
    • Fashion
    • Food
    • Travel
    • Health
    • Washington Visitors
    • Books
    • Military History
    • Life
    • Auto
    • TV Listings
    • Movie Listings
    • Death Notices
    • Entertainment
  • Themes
  • Communities
  • Shopping
    • Stores
    • Coupons
    • Daily Double
    • Promotion
    • How It Works
  • Videos
    • Two Guys
    • Birnbaum on Washington
    • Liz Glover
    • Amanda Carpenter
    • Morning Briefing
    • Documentaries
    • Joe Giganti
    • Video Game Minute
  • Podcasts
    • About Headlines
    • Audio and Radio
    • America's Morning News
  • National

    PRUDEN: Obama's due process doctrine

  • National

    U.S. links 8 to Somali terrorist group

  • Business

    Home sales surge 10.1 percent in October

  • Local

    Fenty trails Gray in D.C. poll

  • Politics

    S.C. governor faces 37 ethics violations

  • National

    China holds lawyer who tried to see Obama

  • World

    Israel-Hamas prisoner swap talks advance

Home » Opinion » Editorials

Thursday, November 5, 2009

EDITORIAL: Freedom: 9, cameras: 0

Rate this story

Average 5.00
after 1 votes
Login or register to rate this story

Three more cities vote down robotic traffic enforcement

  • Font Size -+
  • Print
  • Email
  • Comment
  • Tweet this!
  • Share
  • Article
  • Comments ()
  • Click-2-Listen
  • Videos
Please stand by, images loading!
  • Photos by Bert V. Goulait / The Washington Times
ROAD RULES: Drivers will expect to be extra cautious on the roads with the modifications to the automated enforcement cameras in the District. The District is modifying cameras so they're able to capture speed violations through intersections in addition to the typical red-light runners.

More Editorials Stories

  • EDITORIAL: Hiding evidence of global cooling
  • EDITORIAL: Terrorists use Democratic talking points
  • EDITORIAL: Death for being a Christian
  • EDITORIAL: Another stimulus

By THE WASHINGTON TIMES

If you listen to elected officials as they extol the virtues of traffic cameras, you could be forgiven for thinking that the devices are universally popular. After all, the skewed opinion polls they trumpet describe a public standing behind a remarkably effective product that saves lives. After Tuesday's election, the time has come to dispense with this superficial and demonstrably untrue claim.

Take the city of College Station, Texas, where red-light camera supporters heralded a voter survey in September claiming that 79 percent endorsed cameras as effective and that 64 percent would vote to keep them. Despite heavy voter turnout, however, the support for cameras somehow never materialized Tuesday. Instead, voters approved a citizen's initiative forbidding the city from using cameras to issue tickets.

Another favorite tactic of photo-enforcement supporters is smugly implying that the only people who would oppose the use of cameras must be red-light runners and speeders - after all, no one has the right to run a red light or speed. We do not think the 72 percent of residents in the southern Ohio city of Chillicothe are lawbreakers and criminals.

Nor do we think the majority of residents 75 miles away in Heath believe the bromide that those who don't speed have nothing to worry about from photo radar. Business owner Duane Goodwin, for example, found that as out-of-town motorists started receiving tickets in his city, they would avoid shopping there altogether. When he saw his business suffering, he gathered the signatures needed to put the issue to a vote. The majority sided with Mr. Goodwin on Tuesday.

For those keeping score, cameras were completely shut out. Taking into account the six other cities that have voted in the past on the issue, the score stands at 9 to 0 against traffic cameras. The message could not be more clear: Americans don't want traffic cameras. Nobody has ever forced a referendum demanding the installation of these purportedly popular cameras.

So why are leaders in the District, Maryland and Virginia deaf to public sentiment? From their recent actions, it is hard to conclude anything other than that their ears are attuned only to the sound of cold, hard cash being shoveled into government coffers.

In the past few weeks, Maryland cities have jumped at the chance to set up speed camera traps in "work zones" where no work is going on and "school zones" where there are no students. A well-connected team of lobbyists for the firm Affiliated Computer Services (ACS) convinced a number of jurisdictions to piggyback their program on the existing photo-enforcement contract in Montgomery County. Why waste time, and profit, holding an open and fair bidding process?

The Virginia Legislature, informed by the Virginia Transportation Research Council that red-light cameras increased accidents over their first seven years of deployment, nonetheless voted to reauthorize their use.

In the District, Police Chief Cathy Lanier reportedly is angered that an iPhone application alerts drivers to slow down in advance of speed traps. Obviously, slowing people down is not the District's real priority.

Given the unambiguous public sentiment on the issue, it's time to call an end to the dangerous photo-enforcement game. It's not worth it to sacrifice safety to raise revenue.

[Get Copyright Permissions] Click here for reprint permissions!
Copyright 2009 The Washington Times, LLC

Post a comment

There are comments on this article, submit your opinion!

Please login or register to post a comment

Ask a Question

You Report

Do you have another point of view, photos, audio, video or more information about a story?

Top Stories

Most Read

  1. Islamic center in Maryland keeps ties to Iran
  2. Not invited: Republican lawmakers
  3. EDITORIAL EXCLUSIVE: On terrorists, Justice recused
  4. Religious leaders vow civil disobedience on anti-life issues
  5. KELLNER: New Apple mouse really is 'Magic'
More Top Stories »
  1. Massive bill steals show in health care debate
  2. Report: D.C. schools chief Rhee mishandled sexual misconduct scandal
  3. Company that repaired Chairman Gray's house lacked license
  4. EDITORIAL: Gunning for Sarah Palin
  5. Green energy stimulus growing few jobs

Most Shared

  1. Ego of 'O': It's all about him
  2. Religious leaders vow civil disobedience on anti-life issues
  3. EDITORIAL: Schumer's change of heart
  4. Unemployment taxes hit small firms hard
  5. Green energy stimulus growing few jobs
More Top Stories »
  1. EDITORIAL: Death for being a Christian
  2. Islamic center in Maryland keeps ties to Iran
  3. EDITORIAL EXCLUSIVE: On terrorists, Justice recused
  4. VMI faces probe into sexism
  5. Company that repaired Chairman Gray's house lacked license

Most Commented

  1. Work site arrests of illegals fall dramatically
  2. Lobbyists spending big to shape health care debate
  3. ANALYSIS: Obama takes a bow, but applause is weak
  4. Islamic center in Maryland keeps ties to Iran
  5. Senate Democrats win key vote on health bill
More Top Stories »
  1. EDITORIAL: Gunning for Sarah Palin
  2. Schumer: Dems will pass health bill alone
  3. Green energy stimulus growing few jobs
  4. EDITORIAL: Schumer's change of heart
  5. Religious leaders vow civil disobedience on anti-life issues

Listen to Washington Times Radio

  • America's Morning News

    with John McCaslin and Melanie Morgan

Question of the day

White House officials and Senate Democrats met in private three times last week to craft health care legislation. Do you think these discussions should be more public?

Blogs & Columns

  • Hot Button Blog

    RNC: Breast cancer recommendations may lead to 'rationing'

  • Belief Blog

    Evangelicals OK civil disobedience

  • Out of Context

    Foods that might kill libido

  • On the Fly

    United lifts some 'award' blocking

  • Technology

    Facebook wins round against phishing spammer

  • Redskins 360

    Mason returns

  • SNOBlog

    Beyond 'Woody'

Videos

Advertising Links
TWT Store
  • e-edition
  • Print Edition
  • Weekly Washington Times
TWT Affiliates
  • Middle East Times
  • Golf
  • UPI
  • Arbor Ballroom
  • Washington Times Global
  • About TWT
  • Press Room
  • F.A.Q.
  • Work for TWT
  • Advertise
  • Sponsors
  • Contact Us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Site Map

All site contents © Copyright 2009 The Washington Times, LLC.